US Patent 6630507 - Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants

[bill704]

US Patent 6630507 - Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants....

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is an object of this invention to provide a new class of antioxidant drugs, that have particular application as neuroprotectants, although they are generally useful in the treatment of many oxidation associated diseases.



Yet another object of the invention is to provide a subset of such drugs that can be substantially free of psychoactive or psychotoxic effects, are substantially non-toxic even at very high doses, and have good tissue penetration, for example crossing the blood brain barrier.



It has surprisingly been found that cannabidiol and other cannabinoids can function as neuroprotectants, even though they lack NMDA receptor antagonist activity. This discovery was made possible because of the inventor's recognition of a previously unanticipated antioxidant property of the cannabinoids in general (and cannabidiol in particular) that functions completely independently of antagonism at the NMDA, AMPA and kainate receptors.

Hence the present invention includes methods of
preventing or treating diseases caused by oxidative stress, such as neuronal hypoxia, by administering a prophylactic or therapeutically effective amount of a cannabinoid to a subject who has a disease caused by oxidative stress.



The cannabinoid may be a cannabinoid other than THC, HU-210, or other potent cannabinoid receptor agonists. The cannabinoid may also be other than HU-211 or any other NMDA receptor antagonist that has previously been reported. A potent cannabinoid receptor agonist is one that has an EC50 at the cannabinoid receptor of 50 nM or less, but in more particular embodiments 190 nM or 250 nM or less. In disclosed embodiments the cannabinoid is not psychoactive, and is not psychotoxic even at high doses. In some particularly disclosed embodiments, the cannabinoid is selected from the group.



(See the whole thing here:

Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants - US Patent 6630507)....

 

[Keith Lake]

Well on the one hand it's fantastic to see pharma prepare to make good use of earth's best plant.

On the other hand its a shame they are focusing on and emphasizing the non-pychoactive aspects

Funny how when they want to use the plant - the truth is ok to admit ~"non-toxic even at very high dose"

 

[FreakNature]

This patent was granted in 2003 to the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT as represented by the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, which, on the other hand labels Cannabis as a Class I drug with no medical value. This is not a patent for big pharma. The abstract specifically mentions efficacy w/ Alzheimer's disease; which it seems the WORLD did not know about until this year when another country did some research.

I think this represents the ultimate in hypocricy. I think the news media needs to comment on this. I don't know...Jimbo, where the heck are you??

Health and Human Services my a$$.

 

[merickson]

So if I smoke to relieve the aches of old age, how much do I owe to whom?

Or is it a different use that this patents owns.

(Patenting a plant, how silly. Next thing you know, they'll be telling folks they can't grow their own flowers.)

 

[FreakNature]

The thing about the patent is it focuses on doing it in a non-psychoactive way. And what fun is that??

As long as you experience E U P H O R I A you should be OK.

 

[Damagoman]

So if I smoke to relieve the aches of old age, how much do I owe to whom?

Or is it a different use that this patents owns.

(Patenting a plant, how silly. Next thing you know, they'll be telling folks they can't grow their own flowers.)

They do already.
Some varieties of roses are patented.
Screw 'em, I clone 'em anyway.
Just don't sell them

 

[Jimbo]

Ok...here I am guys...I'm utterly appalled at the crassness in thinking they have the market cornered on something that people have been using since before recorded time!
Who do they think they are! Bunch of Johnny come lately's! What makes them think they can patent something that doesn't even belong to them to patent in the first place?
They have been running it down since the 1930's, and all of a sudden they are saying...WOW this stuff really does have medical potential!!! As if they didn't know this all along. They should have been researching cannabis's potential for 100 years now, instead of just dismissing it as a deadly devil drug that makes you go out and murder your own family; "refer madness"
I mean, I really hope this patent ultimately leads to cannabis legalization, but I am very skeptical of their intentions for this patent.
Thats just my 420 cents worth.

 

[FreakNature]

For this patent from 2003 to come to light today is perfect. Someone with some money needs to sue to have the herb reclassified, at the very least. The guvvumint doesn't have a hollow leg to stand on. I heard Bill Gates has some spare time. I wonder if he's compassionate?

 

[Jimbo]

Did it really have to take 5 years to bring this to light? Or were they just waiting until the patent was granted?

 

[Johnny]

Did it really have to take 5 years to bring this to light? Or were they just waiting until the patent was granted?

The patent was actually granted back then. It seems it really did take this long for it to come to light. There's obviously some reason for the delay.

Is it out of fear of being labelled hypocrites for labelling cannabis as a Class I substance with no medicinal value in one breath and praising the therapeutic properties of cannabinoids in the next?

Whatever the reason, it would only be logical for the government to change the classification of cannabis in the Controlled Substances Act. If they don't it will look rather suspicious.

 

[Jimbo]

The patent was actually granted back then. It seems it really did take this long for it to come to light. There's obviously some reason for the delay.

Is it out of fear of being labelled hypocrites for labelling cannabis as a Class I substance with no medicinal value in one breath and praising the therapeutic properties of cannabinoids in the next?

Whatever the reason, it would only be logical for the government to change the classification of cannabis in the Controlled Substances Act. If they don't it will look rather suspicious.

Hell, it already looks suspicious to me now...something fishy is going on, and I only hope it comes to light soon and in a positive way.
Why the patent to begin with? What will be gained by it for them?
There has to be some money to be gained somehow by this, or at least some kind of edge. But what?
This patent only leaves alot of unanswered questions.

 

[BlackThumb]

I have no doubt that I am going to over-simplify, and exhibit my legal ignorance pertaining to filing, costs and procedures, but why isn't someone like NORML, or better yet a coalition of such organizations who could put together a fund, jumping all over this.
Way short of going for all out legalization, just demanding an official answer to "which branch is full of crap". A) The Judicial branch with zero medical expertise, or B) the USDoHHR,? Select and declare Answer A, or B please.
Seems like a small, reasonable place to start to me.

In my small mind, I envision the hippy handing the brief through the blacked out Bronco window to the dude in the suit with polished shoes and its a done deal, but in reality does it really cost that much more than me going to my local lawyer to write up and initiate a suit, and where exactly would this document be served?

The first paragraph clearly covers all Cannabinoids as the primary object without exception, then Para. 2 states the additional object of development of a non-psychoactive subset. Clearly covers all sources regardless of Delta 9 content or any other specification, so applicable to all pot.

Again, without getting into the ignore common sense, ignore all facts, ignore all world medical organizations, ignore all the voters in MMJ states, ignore feeding and clothing the whole world arguments, why aren't they being tasked to provide an answer to this basic question?
How much would it cost as some estimate, to file a suit against the Feds as stated?

 

[FreakNature]

Like you said - it should be NORML or a group with an established network and funding that causes this action.

To answer your question - lot's of $$$$. Maybe Big Dog can estimate this to some order of magnitude...

 

[BlackThumb]

I guess the main costs stem from repeated appearance's, or do they actually ding you for the court, judge, other staff along with filings/writs and such? Would something like that be filed against a specific entity like D. of Justice or something?
Still seems like NORML, MPP, ASA, Hemp Assoc. and about ten others COULD fund an attempt if made the coalition agenda.
I guess I am probably still way under estimating the costs in $/time in my pointed little head though, and wish it were more than just a piss in a strong headwind.